Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (8008)	3/8/2001 12:28:59 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I do not find cycling along mountain roads an inviting prospect, but who knows, I might like it. I am sure there has been a human impact in National Parks, for the simple reason that there are humans. I have no idea if it is baneful or not. It is my understanding that ecosystems are fairly resilient, and therefore one is likelier to modify rather than destroy them. It is also my understanding that ecosystems are mainly local, and have their own life cycle. In other words, even if we hurt one, it is likely to be within a limited radius, and, on the other hand, lakes and other econeighborhoods die, or are vacated, all the time. I hadn't realized that you were imagining impact. You are right, it is credible, but I suppose it depends on many factors to be significant. For example, if it were intolerable, I assume the animals would shy away from the roads. In the Blue Ridge, one occasionally sees larger animals from the road, but they really tend to keep to the deeper part of the woodland. I don't know how the roads were cut, but they do not appear to be migration paths. Still, it is purely anecdotal.......